查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 《風月報》「風流與下流」論爭再考察--兼論〈花情月意〉的社會性
- The Study of the College Students' Perception of Learing and Attitudes toward Physical Education in Taiwan, Republic of China
- 音樂會的社會性:比較兩場鋼琴獨奏會
- 藝術創作與其社會性[座談會]--社會性議題在藝術作品中的藝術價值探索
- 藝術表現裡的文化批判--從臺灣當代的社會性藝術之現實意識論起
- E-mail的使用對組織溝通民主化的衝擊
- The Social Significance and Artistic Quality of Literary Works
- 「社會秩序維護法」的時代性與社會性
- 從「宗教」與「宗教感」的理解來省思人文宗教--兼論批判理論宗教觀
- 「興造」的社會性和主體性之過渡--存在立場/存有方式
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 《風月報》「風流與下流」論爭再考察--兼論〈花情月意〉的社會性=Research of the Arguments of “Fong Liu and Hsia Liu” on ‘Fong Yueh Pao’--And the Sociality of “Hua Qin Yue Yi” |
---|---|
作 者 | 陳志瑋; | 書刊名 | 臺北師院語文集刊 |
卷 期 | 9 2004.11[民93.11] |
頁 次 | 頁55+57-79 |
分類號 | 823.6 |
關鍵詞 | 風流與下流論爭; 社會性; 花情月意; 風月報; 林紫珊; 林朝鈞、紫珊室主; Arguments of Fong Liu and Hsia Liu; Sociality; Hua Qin Yue Yi; Fong Yueh Pao; Lin Tzi-Shan; Lin Chau-jiun, Tzi Shan Shi Ju; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 《風月報》上的「風流與下流」論爭,雖不過十多回,但論爭中所提出的四個主題:作者人格與作品價值、紀實與虛構、作品內容的社會性,和作品的寫作技巧等問題,迄今仍是文學研究常見的討論。該論爭不但反映了日治末期文人評價文學作品的態度,也反映了新舊文人理念相互影響的現象。 〈花情月意〉的社會性,是「風流與下流」論爭的焦點之一,也是主要分歧點。筆者分析該作品,肯定它在內容上是「社會言情小說」,故筆者認八論爭所提的「社會性」,指涉內容和形式兩者,亦即具有社會性的小說,在文學式上亦應是以白話文寫作的現代文藝。因此一篇作品欠缺社會性,是指它的內容?形式?是兼而有之?論者在論及作品的社會性時,對新文學與舊文學是否採取兩種不同標準?值得研究日治時期新舊文學爭的研者注意、釐清。 |
英文摘要 | The arguments of “Fong Liu and HSia Liu’ on the《Fong Yueh Pao》, although no more than some ten times, but the four theme from the controversy has been a familiar topic of literature studies thus far. : Its not only a reflection of the attitude possessed by the intellectuals under the Japanese occupation, but also a phenomenon of the interaction by the historical and the modern intellectuals. The four themes derived from the controversy are: the author’s personality and the value of his works, reality and fiction, sociality of the content, and the writing skills of their works. The sociality of〈Hua Qin Yue Yi〉is one of the central arguments of “Fong Liu and Hsia Liu”, and also the main deification. I believe it is a “social romance novel” in content, so I consider the “sociality” in this controversy refers both to the content and the form, or a novel with sociality, and also a modern literature written in “Bai hwa wen’ in form. So when saying writings are lack of sociality, whether it is referring to the content or the form, or both of it? When arguer refers to sociality of writings, whether applying two criterions to the modern literature and historical literature? It deserve the attention and comprehension of researchers that studying controversy of Taiwanese Modern and Historical Literature under Japanese Occupation. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。